Start with what you want, then consider experience and practical ties.
Read all six intention statements, reverse scoring, differences from satisfaction and a conversation you can adapt. This is not your partner’s commitment or a forecast.
A mean requires all six ratings, after reversing the keyed statements with 6 minus the response. A higher value means stronger endorsement of these intention statements now, without establishing future persistence.
What part of your own intention is being described?
- These six statements concern your present willingness to continue one current adult partnership and participate in small arrangements that both people freely choose. They do not ask whether your partner will stay or authorise you to speak for them. Wanting a relationship to continue can coexist with dissatisfaction about how it currently works. Keep the person, relationship and recent month in view; an imagined ideal partner is a different subject.
- The investment-model literature distinguishes commitment from satisfaction, outside alternatives and relationship-linked investments. FermatMind uses those distinctions to organise four questions for reflection. Its items and explanations are original, rather than a translation of the published Investment Model Scale. Research about that original instrument does not validate this edition’s means, response wording or interpretation.
How do six statements produce this reading?
- Each item uses a 1–5 rating of how well it describes your current view. Two statements express not wanting to continue or leaning toward ending; their scored values are 6 minus the response. The other four keep their response values. Adding all six gives a sum from 6 to 30, then dividing by six gives a mean from 1 to 5. Displaying 4.3 does not mean an 86% chance of staying.
- This edition requires six valid ratings in this part. Any NA leaves its mean unavailable and retains the rated count. No midpoint, zero or answer from another part fills the gap. All four complete guides remain readable. Insufficient information does not place someone in a low-commitment category.
Reading higher, lower and mixed responses
- A higher mean reflects greater endorsement of these intention-related statements in this attempt. It may help you describe what you are willing to do, but cannot replace another person’s consent, practical circumstances or relationship safety. A lower mean is not a verdict about deserving love. It invites checking whether you currently want this particular partnership to continue, rather than judging your character or capacity for relationships.
- If shared experiences sound welcome while further engagement feels difficult, inspect the specific statements and conditions you had in mind. The mean compresses different reasons. This page provides no high, middle or low cutoffs, and assigns no official personality, commitment tier or relationship stage.
Worked example: wanting to continue is not satisfaction
- In a fictional attempt, Lin answers 5, 4, 2, 4, 1 and 4 in this part’s item order. Reversing the third and fifth statements gives 5, 4, 4, 4, 5 and 4: a sum of 26 and a displayed mean of 26 ÷ 6 = 4.3. This illustrates the calculation; it is neither your result nor an answer pattern to aim for.
- Lin also feels that everyday coordination falls mainly on them, so satisfaction statements receive lower endorsements. One possible sentence is: “I want to continue being with you, and our current arrangements are not working for me. I am willing to discuss one small change we can both choose.” It preserves two different facts without hiding dissatisfaction or requiring the other person to give the same answer.
Counterexample: willingness and feeling compelled
- Another fictional person, Zhou, says they will certainly stay, mainly because of worries about housing, money or other people’s reactions. That sentence alone does not establish freely chosen intention. Even with a higher mean, distinguish “I want this” and “we both freely choose it” from “I currently lack workable options.” The test cannot determine whether a situation is safe.
- Conversely, someone considering a pause in the partnership may still care about the other person and handle shared responsibilities thoughtfully. Lower endorsement of continuation statements does not establish coldness, betrayal or an inability to love. Do not use a number here to demand proof of loyalty from yourself or someone else.
Compare the other three parts without a total
- Continuing intention concerns wanting the partnership to persist. Satisfaction concerns recent experience. Outside options concern the perceived feasibility and appeal of other ways of living. Relationship-linked investment concerns valued resources that would change if the partnership ended. These are not four competing personality types.
- For example, a newer partnership may involve strong willingness and rewarding experience alongside little shared investment. A longer relationship may involve many practical ties while willingness has changed. This edition does not add the three bases together to estimate intention, or select one type from the highest mean. Every guide retains its full text.
A private conversation exercise
- On paper or in private notes of your choice, write three sentences: what you currently want to continue; what you do not want to keep doing unchanged; and one specific view you would like to understand from your partner. Replace “forever,” “certainly” or “you must” with a discussable arrangement. You can also choose not to talk yet and first clarify what you mean.
- This is not an assignment submitted on the page, and it does not require sending ratings to your partner. If you discuss it, allow a different intention or no immediate answer. One conversation does not prove a shared commitment. List practical constraints separately when they need attention, rather than allowing a total score to override them.
Edition limits and revisiting your reading
- These original items have no FermatMind population norms, established reliability or validity, or demonstrated Chinese–English equivalence. They cannot predict breakup, determine relationship quality or instruct someone to stay or leave. A recent disagreement, shared decision, tiredness or a different time frame may change an answer. Without a current partnership, use the public reading without creating an imagined attempt.
- If you revisit the reflection, note your chosen time frame and recent events, then compare which specific responses changed. A change in one decimal place is not evidence that the relationship has improved or worsened. Do not convert this intention mean into scores from another edition or instrument.